Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Needing teachers’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Feb. 23 2014 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

Judy, you are spot on. Step one of improving our education system is reducing class sizes. Do that and then you can add your bells and whistles. I have no problem expecting a higher skill level from teachers but handcuffing, disparaging them from having a voice in their careers and then burdening them with extra expenses for their students is no way to demonstrate how to invest in the future. After all is said and done our children are our future.

Homer1
MIDVALE, UT

Lockhart's 300 million dollar proposal is an outrageous amount of money and a distortion of the proper funding process for education. She completely ignores all the stakeholders including educators to promote this pie in the sky solution to all educational challenges. Not to mention the tidy profits to be made for whoever gets the big contract to unload a pile of tech devices on the state.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Judy,
The legislature does not mandate what specific programs each additional dollar in funding will be used for. That's up to the Education System (not the legislature).

From what I've heard, all the increased funding has already been spoken for (by the Teachers Retirement Fund). So none of it is going to make it into the classroom, or decrease class size, or benefit any of the actual education programs you listed.

Sorry, but the legislature decides the budget, but they don't tell the education system where that increased money must be used.

Talk to people on the school board. They make these decisions, not the legislature.

The legislature can give them more money, but they don't decide where/how it will be used. The school board and districts do. Targeting Lockhart or any legislator for decisions the board of education makes is political, but very lame.

The legislature gave them the money (that's all they CAN do). Don't blame the legislature for how it is used.

Mike in Sandy
Sandy, UT

Lockhart was educated here....see?

Homer1
MIDVALE, UT

2bits--

With all due respect to your efforts to contribute to the dialogue, you are mistaken. The Legislature actually can and does most of the time specify how money is to be spent. The education budget is a complex collection of multiple expenditures, both long term and short term, with legal obligations, bills to be paid, and then funds directed towards long-term strategic expenses. In general, facilities maintenance and construction are generally appropriated separately, textbook monies can ONLY be spent on textbooks, etc. You seem to have a beef with retirement pensions and teacher pay. Those are contractual obligations, so when money does pop up bills that have been put off must be paid.

The problem with surplus funds is that with the years, maybe decades of Legislative neglect towards public education, that money is used to fill in the gaps. We don't have the luxury of using new monies for pet projects, grand visions, because we're simply trying to stay afloat here in Utah. Instead of scrambling angrily over a surplus, the Legislature should commit to a long term support of our public education.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments